Lumpers and Splitters

In the field of biology most people follow the lead of Ernst Mayer, who defined 'species' as "groups of actually or potentially interbreeding natural populations which are reproductively isolated from other such groups." This works tolerably well for living populations of plants and animals, although there is always debate in biological circles as to the exact specifications. However, it is extremely hard to apply this definition to prehistoric populations. In these cases we go with Darwin's view how to decide whether a given form should be considered as a separate species -- "the opinion of naturalists having sound judgment and wide experience seems the only guide to follow."

You better believe this doesn't work.

This has led to a notable schism in the field of biology -- or more exactly, a never-ending series of schisms. It is most noticeable among those who deal with categorizing the fossil record; pretty much any paleontologist can be categorized into one of two categories:

A lumper is someone who tends to place new fossil discoveries into existing categories.

A splitter is someone who tends to give each new discovery its own specific name.

Splitters tend to be field workers, while lumpers tend be the ones who interpret the many fossil discoveries. (While it may or may not be a factor in any individual case, there is generally more glory in discovering a new species, or better, genus, than there is in discovering another Cro-Magnon).

But at least we can have fun with it... I. Doolittle Wright has versified the eternal debate twixt lumpers and splitters in extended limerick form. I swear I'm not making this up. This is what anthropologists do with their spare time.